Such measures as profiling is necessary during these times where terrorist attacks in the U.S. are imminent. No one should feel judged or scared to profiling unless they are suspicious or are a terrorist themselves. Profiling is not harmful to anyone. While it may seem that profiling is an attack to a group of people based on the airport officials' judgment, the only result will be discovering a terrorist or not. The recent incident of an attempted bombing in a U.S. plane just goes to show that even now our airport safety policies are not flawless. Profiling is expedient. It is for the safety of the citizens of this nation. The government is trying their best to keep terrorist attacks out of airports and America.
If students want to pursue their educational success or dreams through a certain school, they should be able to. Some students could feel as if the school they attend is dragging them down in their personal desires if what they want to move forward in is placed in a mediocre state. While colleges guide you toward your career, if students could choose the school that will push them closer to what they want in high school, they could change dreams to reality.
Many students have the same interests and so it is a possibility that a large portion of the population would attend one school. However, the local government could invest more into that particular school. Not to say that the other schools would eventually crumble due to lack of attention, but rather that the more appealing school could receive more to compensate for its large numbers. Students can achieve more by attending the high school of their choice.
Despite the fact that torture can be useful for security reasons or helping a nation, it doesn't change the fact of the harm we would cause that person. The "Golden Rule" in kindergarden applies with this concept of torture. No one wants to be tortured. There are plenty other ways to extract needed information.
It seems as if you are arguing against the statement. You state that presidents should be allowed more than two, but less than four. While you give many good reasons and statistics of why a president shouldn't serve more than four, you give no support or evidence as to why a president should be able to serve three.
Any candidate for a president should know the "stress that is not mentioned on the job application" from past presidents. Everyone knows that being a president is difficult. And perhaps, a president wants to spend his life leading his country.
People in opposition to this statement would claim that if an inefficient president was to serve more than two terms, the country would suffer under his term. However, that is what elections are for. The general people wouldn't vote for a useless president. If a president bolstered America's economy or pulled it through difficult times, the people would want him to continue his role as president, even past his two terms. Franklin D. Roosevelt was elected four times during the time of the Great Depression. He was elected because he proved his ability as a leader and the American people trusted him. Just because presidents are allowed more than two terms does not necessarily mean he will. If a president becomes corrupted within his extended term, the U.S. Constitution gives the right of impeachment as well. Despite George Washington setting the tradition of two terms, if the president is a strong, able leader that America supports, he should be able to serve more than two terms.
Developed countries should be the ones that protect the environment, not the developing ones. Developing countries have their own worries and problems to solve, like their economy, government, and giving sufficient amount of services to their people. To think of solving a worldwide issue is quite overwhelming. They shouldn't be forced to protect the environment when they are not even much of the problem. It is the developed countries that destroy the environment to build new structures and pollute it through excessive use of cars and other transportation. Developed countries have the power and the money to make a difference concerning the issue of protecting the environment. Through their abuse of the environment, developed countries should take responsiblity to protect the environment, rather than force it upon the developing countries.
I think what we have in America today is special. We have many freedoms that countries around the world are unfortunate to have. We have a fair government where the people are not threatened or harmed, as in a communist government or a dictatorship. Slaves were brought over to America with cruelty and the journey was much harder than other slave trade route, but slavery existed at that time. The Americans did not create slavery. Even in Africa, Africans enslaved other Africans. The sufferings of many types of people were wrong, but it was happening all over the world. Although we were contradictory in many things, like the Constitution when we didn't let Africans have equality, we slowly changed and mended what we did wrong in the past.
